Interventions in Committee
 
 
 
RSS feed based on search criteria Export search results - CSV (plain text) Export search results - XML
Add search criteria
View Lawrence MacAulay Profile
Lib. (PE)
On the licensing issue, the $25 or whatever it is, would you like to see that go into a fund and be dedicated to your organization, let's say, or some organization that can do more to promote the recreational fishery? Whether you agree or disagree, I'd also like you to indicate where your people come from outside of the Yukon. Are they mostly Canadians and Americans? Do you have Europeans? What needs to be done?
You have, I would think, a wonderful attraction for people who like to be involved in the wild, who like to be involved in the fishery, and you also have, I would think, a market that you're just touching yet, but that could be expanded into a lot more money. I'd like to have your idea on what you think should be done by governments, or your organization, or.... Where do you see it going?
View Lawrence MacAulay Profile
Lib. (PE)
I was wondering, when you were talking about advertising, if you thought it should be left to governments or should there be a wildlife organization that does promotion.
I'm not fully aware of all that you have in the Yukon, but I would expect that you have a resource that's extremely valuable worldwide. What I'm getting at is, how do you get to the people around the world? There are people all over the world who want to fish and hunt in your area. How do you do this? Do you collect funds from licences? Do you leave that to the Yukon government? Is it under the federal government in terms of tourism?
I think you have a resource that could expand. Could you indicate to me how much expansion there has been over the last five years? Have you enjoyed a large increase in the number of people outside of the Yukon coming to fish in the Yukon? That's what I'm getting at.
If you're satisfied and things are progressing the way you think they should be, that's great, but if you think that there's a potential to increase dramatically, I'd like to hear from you.
View Lawrence MacAulay Profile
Lib. (PE)
Good luck and thank you very much. You have a resource that I think could be valuable worldwide.
View Lawrence MacAulay Profile
Lib. (PE)
Thank you very much.
Randy, yes, you've been a true gentleman and if you can keep Chisholm in his place you deserve a lot of credit. He never has very much to say, Mr. Chisholm, but whatever.
Randy, you handled the issues around this committee in a very decent manner. It was interesting. I didn't always agree with the outcome, probably not very often, but the fact was that you did it with true decency. Without question, as an old clergyman said to me one time, “If I could put on my tombstone, he was a good man”. I can say one thing about you, Mr. Kamp, you are a good man and you served well and I thank you very much.
Some hon. members: Hear, hear!
View Lawrence MacAulay Profile
Lib. (PE)
I think it could be dangerous to take it public because I said things about Randy that were wonderful.
View Judy A. Sgro Profile
Lib. (ON)
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
My apologies to the chair and committee, but it was unavoidable. I'm sure my colleagues all understand how that happens, but I am glad to be here, and I offer my apologies to our witnesses. I knew you were in great hands with the rest of this committee and they ask all kinds of interesting questions.
Dr. Walker, can you elaborate a bit more on decarbonizing, because it's certainly an issue that we're all very concerned about?
View Judy A. Sgro Profile
Lib. (ON)
That's very encouraging. I hope everybody was listening as we go forward.
So 2100 is an awfully long time away, and what's interesting here is that you say it's a reasonable date to have. I guess it seems a very long time to those of us who are impatient, but hopefully progress will be made.
To our other witnesses, we've had a variety of people come before us from various universities and so on. What do we need to do as a country to ensure that our young people who have creative skills and want to be innovators.... Where do we need to be investing more? What roadblocks are in their way? I'd like to open it up for all the panellists to give us some idea of what else we need to be doing to provide opportunities for Canada to position our country better.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
First, Mr. Trost, I applaud you for your initiative. I think it's a wonderful initiative, something that I support—at least I support the principle of how we try to open up parliament to have this sort of a system. In principle, I think most Canadians would support that.
To further walk me through it, which you've already done to a certain degree, if I am someone who wants to chair a particular committee, you're suggesting that I would then be obligated to go out and get x number of signatures, whatever it might be. I would then be responsible for submitting my name some time shortly after the House resumes or predating when committees actually begin. Then it would be done on a preferential ballot where all members would in fact be able to vote. You're suggesting that the principle would just apply to the chairs, and nothing else at this point in time.
Is that a fair reflection of exactly what you're looking for?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
Right.
In regard to the concerns about a majority versus a minority, do you see any scenarios where it could be somewhat problematic? What I'm thinking of is that today, for example, there are some standing committees that have an opposition member as a chair. In a solid majority situation, the opposition could lose that opportunity potentially to chair. I don't know if that's been the case in other Parliaments, in particular the British Parliament. Do you have any opinions or thoughts on that?
The opposite could be the case in a minority situation, where you could see a manipulation to shut out government members from being chair. Do you see that as problematic at all?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
In regard to things such as the special committees, the idea there is that if the Prime Minister at the time calls upon a special committee to look at something, you made reference in the report that it be of the same structure. You then suggest that the same principle would apply, that the entire House would have to vote on the chair of that particular committee.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
The idea of having to have the secret ballot, that principle would apply even for the special committees.
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
Generally speaking, currently in all committees there is a government chair, an official opposition vice-chair, and the second vice-chair is from the third party. Would you still want to see that principle, where all three political parties hold some form of position, whether it's chair, vice-chair, or second vice-chair?
View Kevin Lamoureux Profile
Lib. (MB)
Maybe I could take this opportunity to reinforce the fact that over the years, I think it goes without saying that I've had the opportunity to witness you as the chair and that I think you've done a phenomenal job of making sure the committee is functional and moving forward. I want to wish you the very best in the years ahead and I really appreciated your comments in your S.O. 31 the other day. It was in sync and very professional and touching.
We wish you the very best in the years ahead.
Results: 61 - 75 of 13007 | Page: 5 of 868

|<
<
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
>
>|